GUNNERY v. PAINT.
[To ms EDITOR OE THE "SpEorAr0s.1 Sin,—Mr. Arnold White writes to you under the above heading (Spectator, November 22nd). I have not read his article in the National Review which he refers to, but he seems to think that in that article he had made out a good case against our Admirals, and that he had "cited evidence" against them that they neglect gunnery. You le a History of the Mexican War, Vol. p. quoted by Colonel appear to have expressed a doubt whether all his "allegations were capable of substantiation." If the evidence Mr. White cited in his article in the National Review is equally mis- leading to that of his letter to you, I think you may feel that "alt Mr. White's allegations" are not "capable of substantia- tion." Mr. White in his letter compares two flagships' prize- firing,—the Bulwark,' flagship of the Mediterranean Fleet (all honour to her for the good record in "prize-firing" so early in her commission) with the Empress of India,' now the flag- ship of the second Admiral of our home squadron. But I understand, and believe 1 am correct in stating, that when the 'Empress of India' went through her course of "prize-firing" she was the guardship at Queenstown, joined the Fleet for the Naval Review, went through her "prize-firing" after the Review as a private ship, joined "the home squadron," and became second flagship on October 1st, since which I believe she has not gone through another course of "prize-firing." So far, therefore, as the Admiral is concerned, who in October hoisted his flag on the 'Empress of India,' Mr. White's com- parison of flagships falls through. A comparison between ships, whether flagships or private ships, of the "home squadron" and the ships of our foreign fleets or squadrons is very misleading and unfair. Our foreign fleets and squadrons are manned with our best, and for a full commission, while our home fleet or squadron is at best but a training fleet or squadron, and I believe the ships never keep their crews, as a whole, for more than a year. The rules of the Service prevent our Admirals and officers (who are one and all, I believe, working heart and soul for us in their profession) replying to these misleading and incorrect statements, therefore I trouble you with this letter.—I am, Sir, Ste.,
H. H. MoLYNEux, Retired Captain Royal Navy.
Previous page
